It’s a pity they didn’t have this debate at the start of the campaign
THE ENVELOPE is mightier than the sword. Just ask Seán Gallagher: a man selling a story with more holes in it than a string vest. He was caught out last night. It was riveting stuff.
This was The Frontline – in name and in bruising reality. Pat Kenny, running the war office, delivered an hour and a half of compelling television.
It’s a pity they didn’t have this debate at the start of the campaign. Then again, nothing concentrates the mind like imminent defeat or tantalising victory.
The battle for the presidency reached endgame last night and, for the first time, you could feel the passion and sense the fear.
Two front-runners fighting for the ultimate prize. Both petrified to put a foot wrong. One, striving to make up lost ground. The other, trying to cling on in the face of mounting, damning, evidence.
The perceived no-hopers cut loose. Playing their hearts out on the decks of their sinking ships, hoping, perhaps, to catch a place in a life-raft by hitting the right notes.
Finally, a merciful release from the touchy-feely meanderings of the Áras aspirants.
The tone for the final debate was set at the very start with a question about Seán Gallagher’s connection with Fianna Fáil. He fielded it well, at first, as he has throughout the campaign. It has played well with voters, who appear to have discounted his political past.
Why? Because he was merely a grassroots member and it’s unfair to demonise the decent grassroot.
None of the candidates disagreed. Then David Norris and Martin McGuinness powered in with less palatable facts from Gallagher’s Fianna Fáil CV.
It ended, as these things tend to do, in envelopes, and an account of a €5,000-a-plate fundraiser for Fianna Fáil. Gallagher maintained he played a peripheral role in the event.
McGuinness produced evidence to the contrary.
“I would caution you Seán at this stage, you’re in very murky waters.” A chilling moment. He said he knew a man who paid over a cheque to him when Gallagher delivered photographs of the event to him.
Prove it, countered Seán.
He denied receiving a cheque.
Martin cautioned him. “I have to say, you’re in deep, deep trouble.”
Prove it.
Later in the evening, Pat Kenny demanded clarification. “Sinn Féin are going to produce the man who gave the five grand.”
Gallagher recalibrated. “I may well have delivered the photograph, if he gave me an envelope . . .”
The audience hooted.
Norris, who did himself no harm at all last night, was asked if he had a view. “Not much, except I think the reference to the envelope is a bit unfortunate.” Gallagher, under heavy bombardment – which continued for the rest of the night in relation to his much-vaunted business credentials – began taking on water. He was listing badly by the end of the night.
A game changer?
McGuinness was strong, but he too was holed badly below the waterline when condemning IRA atrocities was considered.
At lunchtime, by the way, the seven had gathered in Google’s headquarters for yet another airing of issues which have precious little to do with the role of president. Newstalk were the facilitators this time.
But it was Dana who came out with the most bizarre intervention during the Newstalk debate.
Host Ivan Yates asked a question about gay marriage and same sex adoption. She took grave offence. Why does she always get these questions? Whereupon she turned – she was at the end of the row – and looked across at the other six.
“Are you all practising Catholics?” There was a stunned silence, followed by some affronted yelping.
Norris (Anglican) said he went to mass in Christ Church on Sunday and Mary Davis, clearly at a loss, murmured that her husband is a member of the Church of Ireland.
Gallagher said he was “unsure” about the issue of gay marriage and same sex adoption because “I don’t know about the research”.
Back to to brass tacks on The Frontline. The most interest was in the two front-runners – Higgins and Gallagher.
Michael D remained resolutely presidential – he could do that, because the others did the hard slog for him. Gallagher strove to remain “above negative campaigning” but could not credibly answer the questions about his political past and business achievements.
And the others? Mitchell was feisty and sensible; Mary Davis did well, but far too late; Dana was very sweet but of no consequence; Martin McGuinness shored up his support. Norris went a long way to demonstrating why he has a unique attraction in Irish life.
At one stage the discussion got bogged down in commodes. (Emptying them in the interests of the people.) A race to the bottom? Or did one candidate manage to rise above?
Friday will tell.
